Ground Zero Cross: A display is not a shrine

On March 28, a group of atheists in New York lost round one in their legal battle to keep the “Ground Zero Cross” out of the National September 11 Museum in lower Manhattan.

Federal Judge Deborah Batts ruled that the object – two steel beams in the shape of a cross that survived the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9/11 – may be displayed in the memorial museum without violating the Establishment clause of the First Amendment. (American Atheists, Inc. v. Port Authority of NY and NJ).

The court acknowledged that many Americans see these steel beams as a symbol of religious hope and meaning.

After all, during the recovery at the site, worship services were held in front of the cross. And in 2011, when it was moved back to Ground Zero from the grounds of a nearby church where it had been temporarily housed, a priest led a ceremonial blessing of the cross.

But for First Amendment purposes, it doesn’t matter how many citizens see the cross as the Cross. What counts constitutionally is how the government uses the object.

As Judge Batts explained in her decision, a “reasonable observer” would understand that the cross is part of an historical exhibit in a memorial museum that includes hundreds of secular artifacts. In that context, viewers are highly unlikely to see the cross-shaped beams as government endorsement of Christianity.

American Atheists calls this ruling an “injustice” and vows to appeal.

At issue in this case – and in the growing number of cases challenging all religious symbols in public spaces – are two very different views of “separation of church and state.”

Judge Batts, correctly in my view, holds that the First Amendment separates church from state, but not religion from public life.

In other words, the Establishment clause prohibits the government from setting up a religious shine at Ground Zero, but does not bar a publicly supported memorial museum from including religious objects or images that inspired recovery workers, victims’ families, and the general public.

By contrast, American Atheists advocates an “absolute separation of church and state,” which would appear to call for a society in which public spaces are entirely religion-free zones.

But “separation” taken this far is no friend of religious liberty.

For James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and other early supporters of church-state separation, authentic religious liberty requires that government remain neutral toward religion while simultaneously upholding the right of religious people and institutions to participate fully in the public square of America.

Ignoring the role of religion – in this case by excluding an artifact with religious significance from a publicly financed museum – is hardly “neutral.” On the contrary, such exclusion sends a message of government hostility to the religious.

The First Amendment does not guarantee atheists or anyone else “freedom from religion.” Frequent exposure to religious symbols and messages is inevitable in our religiously diverse society.

The First Amendment does, however, guarantee “freedom from government -imposed religion” – a core condition of liberty of conscience.

Including the “Ground Zero Cross” in the 9/11 Memorial Museum acknowledges the religious meaning of that tragic day for millions of Americans – without in any way creating a state establishment of religion.

The First Amendment Center is an educational organization and cannot provide legal advice.

Ken Paulson is president of the First Amendment Center and dean of the College of Mass Communication at Middle Tennessee State University. He is also the former editor-in-chief of USA Today.

Gene Policinski, chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute, also is senior vice president of the First Amendment Center, a center of the institute. He is a veteran journalist whose career has included work in newspapers, radio, television and online.

John Seigenthaler founded the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center in 1991 with the mission of creating national discussion, dialogue and debate about First Amendment rights and values.

About The First Amendment Center

We support the First Amendment and build understanding of its core freedoms through education, information and entertainment.

The center serves as a forum for the study and exploration of free-expression issues, including freedom of speech, of the press and of religion, and the rights to assemble and to petition the government.

Founded by John Seigenthaler, the First Amendment Center is an operating program of the Freedom Forum and is associated with the Newseum and the Diversity Institute. The center has offices in the John Seigenthaler Center at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn., and at the Newseum in Washington, D.C.

The center’s website, www.firstamendmentcenter.org, is one of the most authoritative sources of news, information and commentary in the nation on First Amendment issues. It features daily updates on news about First Amendment-related developments, as well as detailed reports about U.S. Supreme Court cases involving the First Amendment, and commentary, analysis and special reports on free expression, press freedom and religious-liberty issues. Support the work of the First Amendment Center.

1 For All

1 for All is a national nonpartisan program designed to build understanding and support for First Amendment freedoms. 1 for All provides teaching materials to the nation’s schools, supports educational events on America’s campuses and reminds the public that the First Amendment serves everyone, regardless of faith, race, gender or political leanings. It is truly one amendment for all. Visit 1 for All at http://1forall.us/

Help tomorrow’s citizens find their voice: Teach the First Amendment

The most basic liberties guaranteed to Americans – embodied in the 45 words of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution – assure Americans a government that is responsible to its citizens and responsive to their wishes.

These 45 words are as alive and important today as they were more than 200 years ago. These liberties are neither liberal nor conservative, Democratic nor Republican – they are the basis for our representative democratic form of government.

We know from studies beginning in 1997 by the nonpartisan First Amendment Center, and from studies commissioned by the Knight Foundation and others, that few adult Americans or high school students can name the individual five freedoms that make up the First Amendment.

The lesson plans – drawn from materials prepared by the Newseum and the First Amendment Center – will draw young people into an exploration of how their freedoms began and how they operate in today’s world. Students will discuss just how far individual rights extend, examining rights in the school environment and public places. The lessons may be used in history and government, civics, language arts and journalism, art and debate classes. They may be used in sections or in their entirety. Many of these lesson plans indicate an overall goal, offer suggestions on how to teach the lesson and list additional resources and enrichment activities.

First Amendment Moot Court Competition

This site no longer is being updated … And the competition itself is moving to Washington, D.C., where the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center is co-sponsoring the “Seigenthaler-Sutherland Cup National First Amendment Moot Court Competition,” March 18-19, in partnership with the Columbus School of Law, of the Catholic University of America.

During the two-day competition in February, each team will participate in a minimum of four rounds, arguing a hypothetical based on a current First Amendment controversy before panels of accomplished jurists, legal scholars and attorneys.

FIRST AMENDMENT CENTER ARCHIVES

State of the First Amendment survey reports

The State of the First Amendment surveys, commissioned since 1997 by the First Amendment Center and Newseum, are a regular check on how Americans view their first freedoms of speech, press, assembly, religion and petition.

The periodic surveys examine public attitudes toward freedom of speech, press, religion and the rights of assembly and petition; and sample public opinion on contemporary issues involving those freedoms.
See the reports.